Talk:Sombrero vs. Volleyball

From TheKolWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Is it really necessary to carry the table out to 100 pounds in each direction?? 40x40 seems like a much more reasonable size.--Hellion 16:05, 4 May 2006 (CDT)

It should go to 60 at least - just having the three skills and the standard item is enough for 40 pounds, add pet buffing spray, snowcones, plexi helmet and 3 tiny plastics and you're at 58 pounds. I'm pretty sure I forgot some stuff too --Climox 16:39, 5 May 2006 (CDT)

This needs to be fixed, my computer has a ridiculously high resolution and it screws up thekolwiki. Furthermore, the table is almost unreadable. This is a great idea for a wiki page but it badly needs to be cleaned up.--SomeStranger (Talk | Contribs) 19:31, 5 May 2006 (CDT)

This table is ridiculous. It's not even funny. It doesn't even need to have a reference to the number 11, it's so ridiculous. I have no idea how to fix it, and it really isn't helping anyone.--Someone Else 08:58, 6 May 2006 (CDT)

This table is program generated. Editing it by hand is just silly. That being said, for completeness, it must go to at least 63 pounds of volleyball and 58 pounds of sombrero. Furthermore, as new items that can further increase familiar weight will probably continue to show up, it makes little sense to stop there. 100 pounds is reasonably safe, and I think not excessive.

I'm in the process of changing the program to generate cleaner looking tables, only 10 wide. The problem now is that I've used HTML syntax, which is seems the wiki doesn't like. Hold tight, please, and I will fix this properly, but please be forewarned that I have some errands to run today and it might not happen until tomorrow.

--Cosette 11:27, 6 May 2006 (CDT)

Why does the wiki replace my tag delimiters with less than and greater than signs and interpret my tags as text?--Cosette 11:55, 6 May 2006 (CDT)

Tables look much better, no broken HTML tags showing up after rendering. Nice image with the formula. Looking to add internal links to individual tables.--Cosette 16:23, 6 May 2006 (CDT)

Cleaned everything up. Put in images for some formulas--the latex input doesn't seem to work as advertised. Added some discussion on Wax Lips and dominating functions, as well as local anchors. The chart is still 100x100, but formatted in such a way that it is much easier to read and not unpleasant. It should fit within the page with a monitor and browser configured at a reasonable resolution.--Cosette 17:39, 6 May 2006 (CDT)

In my opinion, this pages needs some heavy revision in terms of readability. First, I think that the bottom line should be a lot clearer. Tables should always support a final conclusion, and even from deciphering the tables it's not clear what the conclusion is. Is the Sombrero pretty much always better? Second, while the Big-O analysis is rather interesting - especially to another CS geek like me - does it really need to be there? Or can it just need to be mentioned in a sentence or two? Third, let's try to make the table a bit more readable by using some colors and cutoffs. I see that the monster levels jump off to over 1000, and are we ever going to come across a monster greater than 500 or so? Maybe we can just say ">500" and color it red to make it easier to read. Lastly, would graphs work any better for some of these cases? Maybe not 48*53 graphs, but a few to get the point across. Just a few suggestions for future editing. I applaud whoever it was who initially did this page. --Andylicious 1:35, 18 May 2006 (EDT)

  • I concur wholeheartedly, Andy. The first line should be: "Long story short, start using the Sombrero at the Orc Chasm (or whatever the optimized level happens to be)." And THEN get into the detailed analysis. As it is, this just isn't practically helpful. Interesting, mayhaps, but not helpful. --Iason 02:50, 12 June 2006 (CDT)

I converted this to a spreadsheet, I will try and make some graphs. --Evoluder 09:05, 17 June 2006 (CDT)

I added the graph. This was the most straight-forward way I could find to represent crossover pointi. The thick line is the equi-stat line. If it's more helpful just to go from 10 to 0.1 on the weight ratio, just let me know --crallen 12:12pm, 18, September 2006

Is there any way to add JavaScript to a wiki page? It is trivial to code, and could more than replace the table, but I don't know how to add it. --Blibbler 23:09, 28 September 2006 (CDT)

I wrote up a PHP CGI to as an alternative. --Club 17:54, 13 October 2006 (CDT)


Has this been updated for NS13? I don't see the hermit asking about it.--Lxndr 09:04, 22 July 2007 (CDT)

Seeing as how we don't have a sombrero function ready for NS-13, I doubt analysis was run on said non-existent formula. This page is obsolete until further notice.--QuantumNightmare 09:42, 22 July 2007 (CDT)

Formula is one, the other are minor changes - wax lips now give +3 Stats/battle. So even the introductory data needs recalculation.--Rasal 17:38, 27 July 2007 (CDT)

December IOTM

The new familiar for the December IOTM can switch between a volleyball and a sombrero. The merits of such a familiar need to be added and discussed.--Chemistron 01:24, 1 December 2007 (CST)


It would be nice to see the effects of a stat-tuned Bandersnatch included in this analysis. --Y0u 15:51, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

If you assume the volleyball distribution is 2:1:1 then the bandersnatch distribution is 4:0:0 thus for main stat the bandersnath gets twice the stat points, and since the sombrero is also a 2:1:1 distribution the sombrero would need to get twice the stat points to break even with the bandersnatch. I'll explain it quickly assume you get twice the stat points from the volleyball thus see bolded values:

Setting that value equal to Y, we find that:

2*Y = Y[1+sqrt([Monster Level] - 4)]/10

And then, since Y/Y = 1:

2*10 = 1 + Sqrt[(Monster Level) - 4]

Followed by:

(2*10)-1 = Sqrt[(Monster Level) - 4]


361 = Monster Level - 4,

And at last:

365 = Monster Level

--Uzziah 17:31, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Just to make that more understandable the topiary golems are ML 232 so you'd need to be running +133 ML in order to make the sombrero more useful against them, for ascension purposes bandersnatch beats out sombrero hands down the entire way. --Uzziah 17:42, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

I've rewritten the formula section to handle the correct sombrero formula as well as adding some notes about different Mr. Store familiar combinations (llama/sandworm and bandersnatch/sombrero). I didn't bother doing the computation for differences in equipment (as the old formula did) as the algebra got more complicated even without them and the only time I can think of when it should matter much is when you're using a bandersnatch (which is always better anyway). Fixing the tables is left as an exercise for the reader :-)--Carolingian tortoise 21:07, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Removing the tables

I think the giant tables should be replaced by a link to an up-to-date calculator page. Or just simply be removed. --Eleron 02:31, 18 March 2012 (CET)

  • Could probably throw in a thumbnail version of the graphs I posted into the page (which link to the full-size versions), and have a link to a calculator page (which I don't have) --RoyalTonberry 07:47, 18 March 2012 (CET)
    • I wrote this calculator page a long time ago. Is it what you think the page needs? HS v BFV. --Club (#66669) (Talk) 18:57, 19 March 2012 (CET)
      • An updated version of that with correct current formulas would work. Though I think the tables could also just be removed entirely :) --Eleron 21:20, 19 March 2012 (CET)